This is why I don't see any problem with the fees. If you can't afford those fees just use fiat banking. Bitcoin is for people that do value their money, financial freedom and privacy.

In other words: 3rd world, go f*** yourself.

But honestly i think it's good that we finally are able to clearly see what the underlying differences are what Bitcoin should be and what not. My impression is that lots and lots of folks still don't understand that there is a big gap in the Bitcoin community when it comes to that.

"Bitcoin is a worldwide cryptocurrency and digital payment system called the first decentralized digital currency, as the system works without a central repository or single administrator."

Perhaps if you could make a cogent case showing how Bitcoin Segwit is in any way more decentralized than Bitcoin Cash, you might have a point. But so far, all I've seen from you or others is mere hand waving.

Actually he has very good point. What you call Bitcoin Segwit can do ALL the things so called Bitcoin Cash can do and a lot more. This is why BCH is dead. It was born dead.

Well, no. Maybe at some point in the future. But for now, Bitcoin Segwit is useless for any but higher value transactions. You can tell yourself that you like it this way, but Bitcoin Cash supports everything that Bitcoin Segwit does, plus these cheaper items.

What is the use of a decentralized bitcoin if nobody uses it because it is too expensive?

wat the derp

I mean the fees per transaction. I expressed wrong.

Fees are high because there's a spam attack. There's no trick to it. It's just a simple trick.

I know. And that was the reason for my first question. What are you doing bitcoin for being more resistant to such attacks and keeping the rates low in the long term?As I understand it, an increase in block size is a solution; but if there are more alternatives it would be good to be able to listen to them.

This is why I don't see any problem with the fees. If you can't afford those fees just use fiat banking. Bitcoin is for people that do value their money, financial freedom and privacy.

Your vision of what should be bitcoin, is far from being the one that initially captivated so many people, developers, investors, etc... In a third world country, it is really important to have a payment system that is not banked. At the beginning bitcoin was very useful and very popular for those reasons. I do not plan to pay my coffee with bitcoin (and I hope I can do it with LN at some point), but every day bitcoin loses more and more utility in my country. And I'm frustrated to see that every day bitcoin becomes a tool for large investors, banks or investment funds, and ordinary people, on the street, are excluded.And it seems to me, according to my humble opinion and what I have researched, that an increase to 2MB of block size is far from representing a danger or a problem to decentralization (especially when working on the optimization of block size) .This increase would be a gesture of goodwill towards the community and would avoid all these discussions and hatred.

Fees are high - apart from the spam attack -, because demand for blockspace is higher than the supply (and always will be). 2MB/4MB/1024MB wouldn't change it, there are near infinite demand for using the blockchain's utilities; time will always be an unchangeable limit for competing transactions, no matter the blocksize.

Stop bitching about it, that is what called free market, those who value the utility/time/cost of their transactions will outcompete those who do not, same as with every goods/services with free market valuation.

Also, how are high fees a sign of failure? Classic socialist person thinking:"this restaurant is full, it is clearly failing because I can not eat here, RIGHT NOW, for the price i esteem "FAIR" for a table, bruh bruh "Sorry, you just got outpriced by the market.

It really is a bad analogy and does not seem to understand free market capitalism. On the other hand, his vision condemns the countries of the third world to stay out of this system, which seems to me an erroneous idea if we want bitcoin to be successful.[...] The free market means, among other things, free competition. Bitcoin competes for the network effect, and so far only outperforms other currencies by the inertia of being the first.

What is the use of a decentralized bitcoin if nobody uses it because it is too expensive (transaction fees)?

You are saying, literally: "nobody uses it, because so many users use it and that makes it costly.

Can you not see the cognitive dissonance in that?That was my restaurant analogy, and it is a perfect fit. Also, there is a logical fallacy arguing that "the free market rule" and "oh but what about the poor people" in the same sentence.

Pick one, because the laws of economics - just like the laws of physics - doesn't give a shit about human's subjective concepts like "fairness".

What is the use of a decentralized bitcoin if nobody uses it because it is too expensive?

wat the derp

I mean the fees per transaction. I expressed wrong.

Fees are high because there's a spam attack. There's no trick to it. It's just a simple trick.

I know. And that was the reason for my first question. What are you doing bitcoin for being more resistant to such attacks and keeping the rates low in the long term?As I understand it, an increase in block size is a solution; but if there are more alternatives it would be good to be able to listen to them.

If we had bigger blocks malicious miners could fill those, too. Cheap as chips. Then we'd be PayPal2.0 AND slow and expensive. Bollocks.

No I think Gentlemand is right. There's no incentive. No one uses the damn thing.

There are two primary factors that they sank their teeth into and ran with to cause all this excitement - the cancellation of Segwit2X and piss taking with the EDA.

In case we hadn't noticed neither of these will ever, ever, ever happen again.

The EDA goes away forever tomorrow. I suppose they could revive and cancel 2X again for fun but that card might have been played for good. They're going to have to be rather creative to come up with a more compelling narrative in future.

This is why I don't see any problem with the fees. If you can't afford those fees just use fiat banking. Bitcoin is for people that do value their money, financial freedom and privacy.

In other words: 3rd world, go f*** yourself.

But honestly i think it's good that we finally are able to clearly see what the underlying differences are what Bitcoin should be and what not. My impression is that lots and lots of folks still don't understand that there is a big gap in the Bitcoin community when it comes to that.

With Lightning the 3rd world will have access to bitcoin payment channels. And the BTC ecosystem will still be decentralised and working in everyones interests and to our mutual benefit.

On the other hand (and we have several hundred years of precedence to give a concise answer to this) when did centralised corporate interests ever give a flying fuck about the little man, third world or otherwise ??

You have the balls to say that paying high fees is financial freedom. FREEDOM Otherwise I can go back to banksters, why? Different faces, same slavery problem

No, you pay high fees, BECAUSE it is giving you freedom. If you value the cost less than you value the freedom granted, do not use it. It is OPT-IN.In other words:The demand for financial sovereignty through the use of the - voluntary(!)- network of Bitcoin is higher than the supply right now, that is why it is expensive, not because of technical limitations. And spam attack, ofc

No I think Gentlemand is right. There's no incentive. No one uses the damn thing.

There are two primary factors that they sank their teeth into and ran with to cause all this excitement - the cancellation of Segwit2X and piss taking with the EDA.

In case we hadn't noticed neither of these will ever, ever, ever happen again.

The EDA goes away forever tomorrow. I suppose they could revive and cancel 2X again for fun but that card might have been played for good. They're going to have to be rather creative to come up with a more compelling narrative in future.

Did you manage to cash out anything anywhere near the 0.5? You called it, you earned it.

What is the use of a decentralized bitcoin if nobody uses it because it is too expensive?

wat the derp

I mean the fees per transaction. I expressed wrong.

The concern about high fees is real. And that this is important for countries with unstable currencies, corrupt banksters and governments is no longer an exclusivity of developing countries.The divide between rich and poor now is fully global.

And BTC is a way to circumvent these issues also globally. Whether BTC must be the means of exchange directly or via a gateway and how either or and should be implemented is subjected toa general consensus of all stakeholders. Not just part of them. As always this takes time, more than everyone wishes.

The big shots that are telling that they are adressing these problems by splitting up the system are just spraying mist and delusion over their all to real intentions : grab the power. Even if theywill only be in charge of ruins and devastation, they will prefer that over just beeing a participant in a healthy ecosystem.

We are dealing with, I 'm sorry to say, psychopats, originating of a certain place on earth.